《临床误诊误治》杂志2001年第3期“医与法”专栏中所刊发的《一起羊水栓塞纠纷案始末》（下简称《始末》）[1]形式很好,但本人认为该例司法鉴定羊水栓塞的认定不可成立。当前,临床诊断符合病理诊断率尚存在很大距离,而临床诊断羊水栓塞的病理诊断符合率差距更大。近 “A case of amniotic fluid embolism dispute” (hereinafter referred to as “beginning and end”) [1] published in the “Medical Misdiagnosis” magazine in the third issue of “Journal of Clinical Misdiagnosis and Misdiagnosis” 2001 is in good form, but I think this example Forensic identification of amniotic fluid embolism can not be established. At present, there is still a long way to go for clinical diagnosis in line with the pathological diagnosis rate, while the clinical diagnosis of amniotic fluid embolism coincides with the pathological diagnosis of a greater gap. near